Tone from eq or cab?

[suraci]

THe point of this question is this. I noticed recently that because I was using a smaller punchy cab, I did not like the idea of using the bass knob to increase bass.
I am looking for confirmation of a feeling or hunch- that it is really cool to get a part of your tone ( besides fingers, eq, PU and amp eq ) from the cab itself.
Especially ADDING bass to a cab, is almost like forcing it, like an unnatural sound.. we al do it... just a hunch. Among the most skilled in its application.. Eq is often subtractive NOT additive.
I am hoping to use two cabs with strong bias toward 1 punch and 2 bass that is not boomy.

[B-string]

Cabs are very important to tone. EQs are used to work around or to personalize sound from basses, cabs, amp design and room acoustics.

[suraci]

My story is I'm an old time, full time musician ( sax, keys, elec bass) who after a long period of constant bass playing, suddenly quit ( to B3 organ ) and years later when I returned to elec bass, I lost not so much playing as sensitivity to the equipment side- the settings, the ideas about amps, cabs, PUs string height, how hard you play, and where on the string- all the nuances of bass playing, had to be relearned. Problem is, work had slowed down, so the opportunity to constantly experiment on a gig were cut back drastically. I only play once or twice a week on bass now- with the rest on keyboards.
So it is difficult to connect the dots between gear, and sound. That is the Why of this thread. Plus I never fully realized my tonal goals even back in the day.
The more time passed, the more bass players with different concepts and sounds arrived on the scene. From Motown to Marcus is a broad spectrum.
I have decided on 2 basic sounds that I want to get with one Fender bass- old school bass that has less highs - deep but not reggae deep and punch. The other sound is similar to Jaco, esp when he solos.
To simply turn a tone knob for these two tonal pallettes, seems unlikely, even if PART of the HOW to. I feel 2 cabs one VERY old school and the other very punchy with some highs is somehow worth shooting for.
`Edit The issue is cancellation of certain frequencies because xover seems likely.
Also which cab will be the punchy one? Jaco used an 18, unbelievable that he got that sound!
Punch usually comes from 10's, but I am sure 15's can do it as well.

[B-string]

Things are much different than the "old days". Electric bass was just a low ended guitar then. Now we have come to expect much more. I have a rig I enjoy the sound of and after adjusting for the surroundings I change the basic tone for many songs. How do I do this? I use the neck pickup (meaty old school), bridge pickup (bright modern), blend the two, and the basses tone control. Not very often I need to go back to the amp head to adjust basic tone (bass boost switch on or back off). Hope that helps a little.
My equipment choice is just that, my personal choice so it may not be "your sound". I'm using a hybrid amp and a 412 cab although if I did it over I would go with 2 212 cabs. I am a convert from 215 cabs. YMMV, IMO, IMHO, IME all that stuff.

[RickenBoogie]

It's more a matter of cab design then it is size of driver.

[B-string]

Originally Posted by RickenBoogie

It's more a matter of cab design then it is size of driver.

Thats what she said to her friends

[suraci]

For a 15, 1. what are especially killer cabs for punch? I assume there are differing definitions of "punch" as well?
2. Same question for nice deep bass but not boomy, or frighteningly deep.
I have walked ( very briefly !) into places in SOHO where the sound of the bass was frighteningly loud and deep,, literally frightening.

[craig.p]

This is an interesting thread you've started here.

In the majority of cases, EQ'ing away from the flat setting is my last choice. I try to "get my tone" with the instrument, with how I play it, and with my choice of cab. My benchmark is Avatar B212s fed by a power amp fed by the BBE 383 I bought here from Johnny N. The combination goes deep and gives no evidence of any nasty peaks.

However, I do own two sealed cabs that drop off pretty high. One's "worse" in that regard than the other. But you're right -- EQ'ing that drop-off back up can lend lots of character to the sound. I actually like the effect. One of my favorite amps for the "better" of the two is a BBE BMax solid state into a power amp, with the BBE set for zero treble, full mid, and bass at maybe 3 number-wise. A G-K MB200 works well with that cab, too. With either setup I can get a great "bloom" effect down in the lower registers.

The reason I try not to use the second kit too much is that I find my playing gets lazy. Or maybe imprecise is a better word. By that I mean that the cab's inherent leanness down at the bottom, even when it's compensated for with tone controls, lets me get away with too much. Don't get me wrong, I've never been a slob/gorilla player, and in fact I'm just the opposite, but it's so easy to lose maybe 10% of your tightness when you're playing through kit that's lean and fast at the bottom end. Whenever I play through the first kit after having practiced for a couple of weeks with the second, it's usually a bit humbling. So I try to practice exclusively through one of the big Avatars. Keeps me honest when it comes to timing and control. It pays off on stage when the PA is big and goes low; those systems and the rooms they're set up in are usually highly unforgiving of playing that's even borderline imprecise. If a bass player already knows how to "work" a cab that's big and brutal at the low end in a tight, controlled manner during practice, then it's no problem at all for him to work a large sound system in the same way. It becomes simply a change of location.

Not sure this is what you meant, Suraci. I think basically what I was trying to say is that tone's definitely part of it, but the other part is precision (or lack of it).

[B-string]

I have heard the G-K NEO 115 are punchy and deep. Deep bass requires a lot of power and more drivers, intimately turning to mud from a bass guitar. It will sound good on stage and not much further. I know that is a hard concept to grasp and accept but that very low end is best handled by the PA, not the stage rig IMHO, yada yada....

[suraci]

Craig p Thank you- I likely play softer than many here.. I lean towards jazz, and light pop approach to the bass I play in a new age gig.
I guess the imprecision is esp an issue with amplified low end, correct? More unwieldy, at volume!

[suraci]

Originally Posted by B-string

I have heard the G-K NEO 115 are punchy and deep. Deep bass requires a lot of power and more drivers, intimately turning to mud from a bass guitar. It will sound good on stage and not much further. I know that is a hard concept to grasp and accept but that very low end is best handled by the PA, not the stage rig IMHO, yada yada....

I have always disliked hearing a deeper sound ( deeper than on stage amp ) of my bass OFF stage. Hate it actually. I think I don't want really low end bass ( I play down to a low E 41 hz ) > Didn't people ( if I may dare to generalize about these great old school guys ) the Duck Dunn's, Bob Babbitt's, Jamerson's, Willie Week's NOT get a really deep sound????? What frequency did the typical old school, non treble bass cut off at? 60hz? 90?

[B-string]

Well the old straight back Ampeg 810 rolled off at 80Hz, Acoustic 361/301 rolled off at about 80Hz, the 800RB rolls off at 80Hz. Second harmonics and above are the sweeter spot.

[craig.p]

Originally Posted by suraci

Craig p Thank you- I likely play softer than many here.. I lean towards jazz, and light pop approach to the bass I play in a new age gig.
I guess the imprecision is esp an issue with amplified low end, correct? More unwieldy, at volume!

Yes sir, that's what I believe. Big low end at high volumes means the player MUST use a very tight technique, regardless of the stage amp, because his "amp" isn't his stage amp -- it's the sound system's bass bins, which are often big and flubby-sounding especially when you factor in the room.

A side note on soft playing: Not all soft playing is tight and precise. I'm not suggesting yours isn't, just highlighting that some soft players can come out of big sound systems sounding like mud because they haven't learned string control yet.

[suraci]

Craig P
Ok I will take the nicely wrapped bait- what can I do to check out and maybe improve my string control????
edit When my chops were very tough, I used to play at times almost ON the Bridge itself- super high tension there- on my old 57 Precision with HIGH action - talk about tension! I kept moving my right hand closer and closer towards the bridge. I approached a Jaco tone on heavy gauge flats before I had ever heard of genius Jaco. It shows that we old school players of that time were naturally moving towards brighter tighter sounds - Thanks

[Gasocaster]

I like a rear ported, or even open backed amp along with a separate sealed back amp when convenient. I would love to find a decent amp without so many EQ, compressor-limiter (Suck Knobs). Volume , Middle (boost-cut) would be plenty for me.

[suraci]

Originally Posted by Gasocaster

I like a rear ported, or even open backed amp along with a separate sealed back amp when convenient. I would love to find a decent amp without so many EQ, compressor-limiter (Suck Knobs). Volume , Middle (boost-cut) would be plenty for me.

So you are ( ?? ) saying that 2 different sounding ( you said "amp" I assume you mean cab too ?!) cabs, works for you; one ported and deeper, the other sealed and tighter, higher, punchier? Is that about it??

[craig.p]

Hey Suraci it wasn't bait, my friend.

Control comes with practice, where you play on the instrument with your right-hand fingers, and even from your fretting fingers. One practice trick I use is to run a click at 80-90 bpm, then play a 4/4 pattern with each bar consisting of a half note and a half rest. Try to make each half note end exactly at the beginning of each half rest. (We're talking about getting rid of milliseconds of slop.) But you must record your work and then listen to it, otherwise you'll think you're doing better than you really are. Once you're tight at 80, try 100, then 120, etc. (Or try serial quarter notes and quarter rests at the same tempo.)

Another trick I use is to play to dance music where the bass work is machine-made. Every week, I play to cuts from Gaga, Ke$ha, and Stefani, duplicating the synth bass parts and trying not to overhang them. It can be very difficult not to overhang because they are machines that are not sloppy and they simply do not vary. One of the toughest exercises I do is playing to old Missing Persons music, because O'Hearn's bass synth work was either the result of sequencing or extraordinarily good technique. Words is an especially good exercise: though the bass patterns are trivial, they consist of brutally well-timed half notes. In Nashville notation you'd probably want to write the entire bass chart as cut-offs -- that's how precise and staccato they are.

Hope this helps.

[greenboy]

Originally Posted by B-string

Well the old straight back Ampeg 810 rolled off at 80Hz, Acoustic 361/301 rolled off at about 80Hz, the 800RB rolls off at 80Hz. Second harmonics and above are the sweeter spot.

Ultimately a number that says where something rolls off says very little at all (especially if it's from a marketing department, of course). That single number doesn't tell you much about how tight/well-controlled the bass response is - big and boomy and sloppy of a mid-bass hump the enclosure in question might have. It doesn't tell you anything about how much power compression affects the sound at higher levels, nor harmonic distortion, nor how much excursion is actually available before things fall apart.

[B-string]

Originally Posted by greenboy

Ultimately a number that says where something rolls off says very little at all (especially if it's from a marketing department, of course). That single number doesn't tell you much about how tight/well-controlled the bass response is - big and boomy and sloppy of a mid-bass hump the enclosure in question might have. It doesn't tell you anything about how much power compression affects the sound at higher levels, nor harmonic distortion, nor how much excursion is actually available before things fall apart.

Not assuming any of that .
The roll off was used 1) to accommodate the 10" drivers 2) to use all that power to get to the audience not just rattle the stage. In the old days bass rarely went into FOH systems unless it was a major concert. (Think back to the Beatles trying to play Dodger stadium with Vox amps )

[suraci]

Originally Posted by greenboy

Ultimately a number that says where something rolls off says very little at all (especially if it's from a marketing department, of course). That single number doesn't tell you much about how tight/well-controlled the bass response is - big and boomy and sloppy of a mid-bass hump the enclosure in question might have. It doesn't tell you anything about how much power compression affects the sound at higher levels, nor harmonic distortion, nor how much excursion is actually available before things fall apart.

To take what I believe ( with my patchy knowledge ) you are saying a step further: even a visual "scope" ( I forgot what that is called- frequency response maybe ) of the WHOLE frequency spectrum of the cab; even that, does not tell the whole story, on how boomy or tight or how low without boom a cab will perform. Is that correct?
It seems like for a pure player not electrical engineer/musician like some here... my only hope is to try these cabs out, and take specs as only one factor among many, where the ear is the ultimate arbiter.